3 ms·
I don't think that Challenger and Columbia suffered the same problems. They weren't even close. Unless the problem is "there was some lack of understanding in
by woliveirajr 10y ago
I don't think that Challenger and Columbia suffered the same problems. They weren't even close.
Unless the problem is "there was some lack of understanding in the potential danger of it, and everything should be aborted setting a lower acceptable risk", or something like that.
Which would not only impacted and prevented Challenger and Columbia, but would have stopped probably all other missions, since it's impossible to know for sure how high or low the acceptable-risk-bar should be put.
- Waterluvian 10y agoDidn't Feynman famously conclude that Challenger was largely to the blame of a culture that didn't respect safety over timeline and budget? That part felt a lot like Apollo 1. I recall reading that there was a fundamental ignorance at critical levels of management t on how risk is even measured.
- woliveirajr 10y agoYes, in the end it can be disrespect for safety... but in the long run, it's easy to miss details that can lead to problems or disasters. Sometimes one person misses reporting something that seemed to be small, but have consequences. Sometimes one reports so much because, well, "hey I warned", but it gets lost on many others warnings that were issued and didn't happen, and people aren't sensitive to warnings anymore. It's not easy to set the limit on where everybody should be worried and where it's just acceptable or even noticed.